Appendix B.8 – Siska Indian Band I - Background Information Siska Indian Band (Siska) is part of the Nlaka’pamux Nation (pronounced “Ing-khla-kap-muh”), whose asserted traditional territory encompasses part of south central British Columbia (BC) from the northern United States to north of Kamloops. The Project pipeline right of way (RoW) crosses Nlaka’pamux’s asserted traditional territory. Siska has 11 reserves: Siska Flat No. 3, Siska Flat No. 5A, Siska Flat No. 5B, Siska Flat No. 8, Humhampt No. 6, Humhampt No. 6A, Kupchynalth No. 1, Kupchynalth No. 2, Moosh No. 4, Nahamanak No. 7, and Zaht No. 5. There are 315 registered Siska members, of whom 89 live on a Siska reserve, 14 live on another reserve, and 212 live off reserve. Siska members historically spoke the Nlaka’pamux language; according to 2011 census data 11.5% of members have at least some knowledge of the language. Siska is a party to the Nlaka’pamux Nation protective Writ of Summons, which was filed in the BC Supreme Court on December 10, 2003, asserting Aboriginal title to a territory identified in the Writ. The Writ also includes Lower Nicola Indian Band, Ashcroft Indian Band, Boothroyd Indian Band, Boston Bar First Nation, Coldwater Indian Band, Cook’s Ferry Indian Band, Kanaka Bar Indian Band, Lytton First Nation, Nicomen Indian Band, Nooaitch Indian Band, Oregon Jack Creek Band, Shackan First Nation, Skuppah First Nation, and Spuzzum First Nation. II - Preliminary Strength of Claim Assessment • Siska is a member band of the Nlaka’pamux Nation. Approximately 226 kilometres (km) of the proposed pipeline RoW and four pipeline facilities (i.e. Kamloops Terminal, Stump Station, Kingsvale Station and Hope Station) would be located within Nlaka'pamux’s asserted traditional territory. The RoW is approximately 48 km from the nearest Siska reserve. • The Crown's preliminary assessment of the Nlaka’pamux Nation's claim for Aboriginal rights, over the section of the Project that spans Kamloops to southwest of Hope, involves a range of a weak to strong prima facie claims. The areas assessed to have strong prima facie claims are in the vicinity of the Nicola Valley south towards the Coquihalla Lakes, which most available ethnographers indicate to be within the Nlaka’pamux territory, and there are some indications of Nlaka’pamux hunting, fishing, gathering uses in the Nicola valley area around the time of contact, with connecting trails. The claims diminish in the area north of Stump Lake, as it is unclear whether this falls within Nlaka’pamux territory, and there is indication of an ancestral connection between the Nlaka’pamux community who moved into the north end of Nicola Lake, intermarrying with the Stewix/Okanagan, which could support a moderate prima facie claim. The prima facie claim diminishes to weak in the vicinity of Hope as it is understood that area is outside the area ethnographers attribute to historic Nlaka’pamux use1. 1 Ministry of Justice, Aboriginal Research Division, Nlakapamux:Review of Ethnographic and Historical Sources (Revised November 20, 2013; Teit, James, “The Thompson Indians of British Columbia” in Memoirs of the American Museum of Natural 1 • The Crown's preliminary assessment of the Nlaka’pamux Nation's claim for Aboriginal title over the section of the Project that spans Kamloops to southwest of Hope, involves a range of a weak to strong prima facie claims. The area assessed to have a strong prima facie claim is in the vicinity of Merritt, which is within the area considered by ethnographers to be within Nlaka’pamux territory, and there are indications for several historic villages in proximity in the Nicola Valley that were likely occupied by the Nlaka’pamux at 1846. The areas with weaker claims include those outside the area ethnographers attribute to the Nlaka’pamux (e.g. north of Stump Lake to Kamloops, and in the vicinity of Hope) and there is no/limited indication of historic Nlaka’pamux use at 18462. III - Involvement in the NEB and Crown Consultation Process Given the nature and location of the Project, and the potential impacts of the Project on Siska’s Aboriginal Interests, the Crown is of the view that the legal duty to consult Siska lies at the middle portion of the Haida consultation spectrum. Siska was placed on Schedule B of the Section 11 Order issued by the Environmental Assessment Office (EAO), which affords Siska opportunities to be consulted at a deeper level. Siska was not registered as an intervenor or commenter in the National Energy Board (NEB) process, and did not submit an application for funding to the NEB. Siska was kept informed of the Crown’s consultation activities during the course of the NEB review through various correspondences from the Major Projects Management Office (MPMO). Siska’s engagement in consultation activities with the Crown began with correspondence in the post-NEB hearing phase and interest in meeting to discuss the Project as well as potential impacts on Siska’s Aboriginal Interests. The MPMO offered Siska $6,000 in participant funding for consultations following the close of the NEB hearing record. MPMO offered Siska an additional $7,000 to support their participation in consultations following the release of the NEB Recommendation Report. Siska did not make use of these funding opportunities. EAO provided Siska with $5,000 in capacity funding towards participation in the provincial process on October 27, 2016. The Crown provided a first draft of this Report to Siska for review and comment on August 17, 2016. The Crown did not receive comments from Siska on the draft Report. Siska met with the Crown on August 9, 2016 to discuss the Project. A second draft of this Report was provided to Aboriginal groups for review and comment on November 1, 2016. The Crown has not received comments from Siska. History, Volume II, 1900.; Dawson, George M., “Notes on the Shuswap People of British Columbia” in Transactions of the Royal Society of Canada, Section II, 1891; Wyatt, David, “Thompson” in Handbook of North American Indians, Vol. 12, Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1998. 2 Ibid. 2 IV - Summary of Key Siska Issues and Concerns Raised Based on key issues and concerns raised by other Nlaka’pamux groups through the NEB hearing process, it is possible to infer that the Project may impact Siska’s Aboriginal Interests by affecting their ability to hunt, trap, gather and fish. The Project could potentially impact cultural and spiritual sites, and contaminate rivers and smaller fish bearing streams in the event of an accident or malfunction. Esh-kn-am Cultural Resource Management Services conducted a joint, third-party traditional land and resource use study, the Traditional Knowledge Project for the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project (the Traditional Knowledge Project) for Coldwater Indian Band, Cook’s Ferry Indian Band, Siska Indian Band, and Boston Bar First Nation (participating bands). In November 2016, the Traditional Knowledge Project report was provided to the Crown on the condition that it be used for the Project, and not be used for any other purpose. Concerns raised by participating bands in the Traditional Knowledge Project include: • Potential environmental impacts affecting the integrity of the aquatic system, and impacts on spawning grounds, traditional medicines, and wildlife migration and mating; • Protection of water for future generations including springs, creeks, falls, lakes and all mountain water; • Use of herbicides may impact food sources and Siska’s health; • Potential impacts due to the presence of Project-related workforce, including pollution, increased pressure on wildlife and vegetation, health resources (e.g., hospitals), and safety for women; • Potential impacts on Cultural Survival Areas, which are linked to Siska’s health, safety and overall well-being; • Potential impacts on spiritual areas, and cultural sites and trails that provide training places for their children and help Siska to hold onto their culture; • Increased access by non-Aboriginals in to the traditional territory (including Project-related workers) if the pipeline were to be approved, as this would provide more access to hunters due to increased infrastructure, and would increase pressures on hunting and fishing resources; • Disruption of access to traditional foods and cultural sites; and • Potential impacts of a spill and clarity from the proponent on spill response procedures. In a meeting with the Crown on August 9, 2016, Siska indicated that successful consultation would involve the development of trust and relationships between Aboriginal groups and the Crown and noted their experience with successful engagement with the province and Teck in the mining sector. Siska also indicated that capacity funding is insufficient for them to participate fully in the review. Siska identified the following Project-related issues and concerns in the August 9, 2016 meeting with the Crown: • Historical infringements of the existing Trans Mountain pipeline on Siska’s Aboriginal Interests must be reconciled prior to Siska’s engagement in discussion about the Project. Siska asserted that their community is opposed to the Project until historical grievances are addressed; 3 • Lack of presence of the federal Crown at the discussion table earlier in the NEB review process; • Inadequate staff, resources, and funding to participate in the Crown consultation process; • In Siska’s confidential traditional land and resource use study submitted to the NEB, Siska identified and mapped traditional crossings, hunting areas, spiritual sites such as baby-naming places, the sites of puberty rights ceremonies, and training areas in Siska’s traditional territory that have been negatively impacted by the Trans Mountain pipeline; • A release of oil in the event of a pipeline spill has the potential to have a massive impact on Siska’s Interests; and • Lack of trust between Siska and the proponent and this relationship differs from other proponents that currently operate projects in Siska’s traditional territory.